I’ll admit that I don’t know much about hunting from practical experience, most of what I understand is theoretical. So I turned to Wikipedia for a direction in which to take my research. I read a bit about the history and development of hunting, which also led me to methods and strategy used in hunting. Then I had a curious realization.

Wikipedia mentioned somewhere (not going to look for it just now) about hunting as a subsistence method of acquiring food. I had to think about it a little bit. Subsistence. I hadn’t really given it much thought before, but it makes more sense when you try to put it in numbers. Hunting is highly time- and energy-consuming. It’s inefficient.

Generally speaking, hunting is a high-risk, low-reward activity. People and animals consume far more food than hunting will reliably provide, which is probably part of the reason why agriculture wins out in the long run. It can be standardized. Its technique can be refined. It’s far more regular and predictable. You reap what you sow.

So, I continued this thought about hunters and hunting, and the types of skills that might be used actively and be applicable across a variety of situations. The list of hunting strategies really helped me out in this regard. Identifying and exploiting weakness. Misdirection and ambush. Decoys, distractions, and traps.

Single out a target and drive it to the point of exhaustion. Then, strike at the moment when it’s most vulnerable. Find weaknesses where they exist and exploit them. Create them where they don’t. Seek and destroy. Cat and mouse. Tenderize the meat. It isn’t about playing fair, it’s about playing to win. It’s asymmetrical because it can be.

There’s a dividing line, too. As I said, hunting isn’t about fairness, it’s about survival. The only rule is don’t lose. There’s no such thing as cheating. Glorifying the hunt, making it about the challenge, or “the game,” is missing the point. Ruthlessness and cunning. Patience. Going days without a target, subsisting on your last catch.